<b>Improvement on the quality of life in patients who underwent bariatric surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to compare the scores of health related quality of life (HRQOL) of candidates for bariatric surgery with patients that underwent bariatric surgery at different time intervals. A cross sectional study was performed in the city of Maringá and Paranavaí, Paraná, Brazil, with 44 candidates to bariatric surgery and 63 individuals submitted to it. The group of individuals submitted to bariatric surgery was divided into 3 subgroups according to the elapsed time of surgery. (more than 18 months - G2; at least 19 and maximum 36 months - G3 and more than 36 months - G4).The quality of life related to the health of the patients was assessed by the SF-36 and BAROS. The comparison among groups was performed by using parametric and non-parametric statistic tests. The magnitude of the effects of the bariatric surgery by effect size (ES) was also evaluated. The assessment of HRQOL shows differences among the groups, with lower scores observed in group 4 when compared to group2. Acomparison of mean scores of the domains of the SF-36 shows that the groups formed by people who underwent bariatric surgery have average scores significantly higher than those presented by candidates to bariatric surgery (p < 0.05). Though not return to the levels of candidates to bariatric surgery, the scores of the areas “Pain body” and “General health”, presented by the groups 2 and 4, as well as those submitted by the groups 2 and 3 for the field “Vitality”, suggest a worsening in HRQOL with the passage of time after surgery. The results of this study indicate that people who suffer from morbid obesity have a strong impact on HRQOL and suggest that the implementation of bariatric surgery is able to promote improvements HRQOL important for these people.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".